Isn't it interesting how cut-and-dried things are when you're in opposition? We've just heard Charles Chauvel on radio arguing for the abolition of the defence of provocation for those accused of murder. This has nothing to do with Clayton Weatherston; rather, it comes in the wake of the manslaugher verdict against Hungarian man Ferdinand Ambach yesterday.
If Charles Chauvel and his colleagues were so opposed to the defence of provocation, why didn't they legislate during their nine years in government? After all, the circumstances in the case are hardly unique, with the possible exception of a banjo being used as the weapon. It's not as if this is the first time that the defence of provocation has been used when a defendant claims to have received unwanted or unsolicited sexual advances. Wethinks Labour doth protest too much!
5 comments:
Anything to do with the fact that the victim was gay and so is Charles?
Highly likely Lucy, but I left the thread open enough to see if anyone would make the connection - and it didn't take long!
I've also heard on the radio that Gay Rights groups are outraged by the verdict.
Strewth, that was quick. I just theorized that the defence of provocation would be next on the block, but I was commenting on the Clayton Weatherston case.
I suspect a few cases will come out and be stacked up against this latest crusade.
Maybe its a good thing, but the end result is often worse legislation.
My comments on provocation and Manslaughter
Yup this will get the lefties well and truly going.
But how will it interface with the defence of lack of responsibility in cases where a battered woman kills her partner. there have been a few cases in NZ where that defence has been successfully, now, advanced. the principles are the same imho.
Exactly the point. If the defence of provocation is done away with it shall leave cases as battered wives (or husbands) without a suitable defence under the law. I would suggest that Labour came to the same conclusion and perhaps the Rainbow Coalition had to put up with this not being repealed in turn for something else. Obviously Charles is one of a few MPs in Labour that could front on this topic but he does himself no favours. I thought the defendant went with a very poor case but the jury was convinced.
Post a Comment